Feasibility of storing CO2 in the Utsira formation as part of a long term Dutch CCS strategy: An evaluation based on a GIS/MARKAL toolbox

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2009.09.002Get rights and content

Abstract

This study provides insight into the feasibility of a CO2 trunkline from the Netherlands to the Utsira formation in the Norwegian part of the North Sea, which is a large geological storage reservoir for CO2. The feasibility is investigated in competition with CO2 storage in onshore and near-offshore sinks in the Netherlands. Least-cost modelling with a MARKAL model in combination with ArcGIS was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the trunkline as part of a Dutch greenhouse gas emission reduction strategy for the Dutch electricity sector and CO2 intensive industry. The results show that under the condition that a CO2 permit price increases from €25 per tCO2 in 2010 to €60 per tCO2 in 2030, and remains at this level up to 2050, CO2 emissions in the Netherlands could reduce with 67% in 2050 compared to 1990, and investment in the Utsira trunkline may be cost-effective from 2020–2030 provided that Belgian and German CO2 is transported and stored via the Netherlands as well. In this case, by 2050 more than 2.1 GtCO2 would have been transported from the Netherlands to the Utsira formation. However, if the Utsira trunkline is not used for transportation of CO2 from Belgium and Germany, it may become cost-effective 10 years later, and less than 1.3 GtCO2 from the Netherlands would have been stored in the Utsira formation by 2050. On the short term, CO2 storage in Dutch fields appears more cost-effective than in the Utsira formation, but as yet there are major uncertainties related to the timing and effective exploitation of the Dutch offshore storage opportunities.

Introduction

CO2 capture and storage (CCS) is increasingly considered a crucial technology for mitigating climate change (IPCC, 2007). An important precondition for the implementation of CCS, however, will be the realisation of a CO2 transport and storage infrastructure. In North West Europe part of this infrastructure may be constructed in the North Sea because of the large CO2 storage potentials that have been identified there. For example, in the Norwegian part of the North Sea, storage capacity has been estimated to be 148 GtCO2 in aquifers, 4.4 GtCO2 in gas fields, and 4.8 GtCO2 in oil fields (BERR, 2007, Bøe et al., 2002). In the part of the North Sea that belongs to the United Kingdom (UK), the storage potential has been estimated to be 14.5 GtCO2 in aquifers, 6.0 GtCO2 in gas fields, and 4.2 GtCO2 in oil fields (BERR, 2007).

The geological reservoirs under the North Sea with very large CO2 storage potentials (e.g. large reservoirs in the Bunter Sandstone formation in the UK part of the North Sea, or the Utsira formation in the Norwegian part of the North Sea) may be indispensable when large amounts of CO2 need to be stored (Damen et al., 2009). A North Sea pipeline network could connect CO2 sources in countries around the North Sea to such a geological storage reservoir. So far most studies of trans-boundary transport crossing the North Sea have concentrated on the use of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). For example, Markussen et al. (2002) looked at the use of large volumes of CO2 from the UK, Denmark, and Norway for EOR on the North Sea continental shelf. According to them it is cost-effective to sequester around 680 MtCO2 in the North Sea while at the same time producing an additional amount of two billion barrels of oil. More recently, a study in the UK (BERR, 2007), which examined a CO2 infrastructure for storing CO2 from UK and Norwegian sources in the North Sea, found that only for the purpose of EOR, it would be worthwhile to transport CO2 from the UK to Norway.1 Also in the Netherlands, a study of the Rotterdam Climate Initiative to reduce CO2 emissions in the Rotterdam region, considered CO2 transport to Norway only for EOR purposes (Hoog, 2008). Furthermore, the authors of the IEA GHG study, which calculated cost curves of CO2 transport and storage for Europe (IEA GHG, 2005a), did not include the aquifers with large CO2 storage potentials such as the Utsira formation in their analysis. However, recent broader analyses (Broek et al., 2008, Broek et al., 2009, Damen et al., 2009) showed that CO2 storage in very large geological storage reservoirs, can make CO2 trans-boundary transport for the mere purpose of CO2 storage an interesting option as well. Yet, a decision to invest in a major trunkline across the North Sea to such a reservoir, requires additional insights into its feasibility with respect to costs and organisation.

In this paper, we, therefore, aim to assess the cost-effectiveness of CCS and CO2 storage in a very large formation under the North Sea in competition with CCS and CO2 storage in smaller nearby formations or in competition with other CO2 mitigation options. We also try to identify the boundary conditions that make investments in a major CO2 pipeline across the North Sea worthwhile, and to assess suitable routings for this pipeline. Finally, we will make a first inventory of organisational issues related to its construction.

We will investigate these issues by investigating the specific case of a CO2 trunkline from the Netherlands to the Utsira formation. This formation has already been used for CO2 injection from 1996 in the Sleipner project, the first commercial project to store CO2 in a saline aquifer (Gale et al., 2001, Hermanrud et al., 2009, Torp and Gale, 2004). This formation consisting of sand and sandstone, is located east of Norway from ca 58°N to 62°N and covers an area of up to 470 km in North-South direction and up to 100 km in East-West direction, the thickness is probably not more than 250 m, and is located at a depth of 500–1500 m below the sea floor (Bøe et al., 2002) and a water depth of 80–100 m (Torp and Brown, 2004). The formation is of special interest due to its enormous theoretical CO2 storage potential (42 GtCO2) and its high permeability (Bøe et al., 2002). The permeability is in the order of 3500 mD, and the porosity ranges from 27% to 42% (Torp and Gale, 2004). By using a general storage efficiency of 6% for open aquifers, the pore volume that can be used for CO2 storage is estimated to be 55 km3 (Bøe et al., 2002). Furthermore, it is overlain by the Nordland shale (Bøe et al., 2002) consisting of fine-grained clays or silty clays, through which it is unlikely that CO2 will leak (Kemp et al., 2002).

The structure of this paper is as follows. Details about the adopted methodology and input data can be found in Section 2. Results are presented and discussed in Sections 3 Results, 4 Discussion of the outcomes. In Section 5 we discuss a few organisational issues, and finally in Section 6 conclusions are drawn with respect to the feasibility of a CO2 trunkline from the Netherlands to the Utsira formation. It should be noted that the scope of the study is limited to sources that emit more than 100 ktCO2 in the industrial, electricity and cogeneration sector in which CO2 capture can be applied. In this paper, a discount rate of 7% is used, and all costs are in €2007.

Section snippets

Overview

To evaluate the techno-economic feasibility of a CO2 trunkline from the Netherlands to the Utsira formation, temporal and spatial dimensions need to be taken into account explicitly. Therefore we use a toolbox integrating ArcGIS, a geographical information system (GIS) with elaborated spatial and routing functions, and the MARKAL (an acronym for MARKet ALlocation) tool, which can generate energy bottom-up models to calculate energy technology configurations over time (Loulou et al., 2004). More

Base case

In this section the results of the MARKAL-NL-UU runs are described for the base case. In order to meet the growing electricity demand and to offset the lower availability of wind and solar capacity, the power generation capacity more than doubles over the analysis period. Due to the assumed CO2 permit price (43 €/tCO2 in 2020 and 60 €/tCO2 from 2030 onwards) and the renewable energy target, CO2 emissions are reduced by 29% and 67% compared to the 1990 level in the electricity generation sector

Discussion of the outcomes

In this paper the development of a Dutch CO2 infrastructure that would include an offshore trunkline to the Utsira formation was investigated taking into account policy to mitigate CO2 emissions. The applied model MARKAL-NL-UU in combination with ArcGIS indicates that CO2 capture and storage in the Netherlands may increase steeply around 2020. Projections of total volume captured are in the range of 26–39 MtCO2/yr. These figures are in line with regional plans in the Netherlands. In the

Discussion of some organisational issues

From a Dutch perspective, a number of options are conceivable for setting up a CO2 transport network. These options can include (or are a combination of) a network connecting CO2 sources to onshore storage sites, to Dutch near-offshore hydrocarbon fields, or to a huge reservoir underneath the North Sea (in this study the Utsira formation). Some organisational implications of the different options are pointed out:

Conclusions

In this research we combined the energy bottom-up model MARKAL and the geographic information system, ArcGIS, to assess the feasibility of using the Utsira formation as part of a long-term Dutch strategy to develop a CO2 infrastructure. We strived to determine suitable technical configurations for such a pipeline, to assess the boundary conditions making its investment worthwhile, and to make a first inventory of the organisational implications around the construction of this pipeline.

Acknowledgements

This research work was supported by the CATO programme and ECN (project ECN-X—09-017). The CATO programme is the Dutch national research programme on CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS), and is financially supported by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and the consortium partners (for more information, see www.CO2-cato.nl). The authors would like to thank Paul Lako, Raouf Saidi, and Ad Seebregts (ECN Policy Studies), Tore Torp (StatoilHydro), Luuk Buit (Gasunie), Leslie Kramers, Ton Wildenborg,

References (75)

  • P. Viebahn et al.

    Energy-economic and structural, and industrial policy analysis of re-fitting coal fired power plants with CO2-capture in North Rhine-Westphalia/Germany

    Energy Procedia

    (2009)
  • P.E.S. Bergmo et al.

    Exploring geological storage sites for CO2 from Norwegian gas power plants: Utsira South

    Energy Procedia

    (2009)
  • BERR, 2007, Development of a CO2 transport and storage network in the North Sea, Report to the North Sea Basin Task...
  • Bøe, R., Magnus, C., Osmundsen, P.T., Rindstad, B.I., 2002, Geological storage of CO2 from combustion of fossil fuel....
  • Broek, M.v.d., E. Brederode, A. Ramírez, L. Kramers, M.V.D. Kuip, T. Wildenborg, W. Turkenburg, A. Faaij, 2009....
  • M.v.d. Broek et al.

    Planning for an electricity sector with carbon capture and storage. Case of the Netherlands

    International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

    (2008)
  • Buit, L., 2009. Personal communication with L. Buit of Gasunie about cost and performance data of pipelines from the...
  • CASTOR project, 2004. European Castor project on the capture and geological storage of CO2, http://www.co2castor.com...
  • Council of European Union, 2008. Presidency Conclusions of Brussels European Council of 11 and 12 December...
  • CSA Group, 2008, Assessment of the potential for geological storage of CO2 for the island of Ireland. Report prepared...
  • B.W. Daniëls et al.

    Trend analysis air pollution. The effects of the Dutch climate programme

    Clean and Efficient on the Emissions of Air Pollutants

    (2008)
  • E.ON, 2007. E.ON plans hard coal fired power station in Antwerp harbour area (press release),...
  • EC, 2008. Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the council on the promotion of the use of energy...
  • EU Council Environment, 2005. Press Release, 2647th Council Meeting Environment Brussels, March 10,...
  • EU Geocapacity, 2009, Assessing European capacity for geological storage of carbon dioxide. D42 GeoCapacity final...
  • EU PV Technology Platform

    A Strategic Research Agenda for Photovoltaic Solar Energy Technology Research and Development in Support of Realizing the Vision for Photovoltaic Technology

    (2007)
  • EZ, 2002a. Mining Act, Act of 31st of October 2002. Rules related to the exploration for and production of mining...
  • EZ, 2002b. Mining Decree, Decree of 6th of December 2002 related to rules for the enforcement of the Mining Act (in...
  • EZ, VROM, V&W, 1984. Dutch policy plan pipelines (in Dutch), extended up to 2008 Netherlands Ministries of Economic...
  • J. Gale et al.

    Demonstrating the potential for geological storage of CO2: the Sleipner and GESTCO projects

    Environmental Geosciences

    (2001)
  • GD et al.

    Kurzstudie CO2-Speicherpotenzial in NRW (not publicly available yet)

    (2005)
  • R. Harmsen et al.

    Provincial Ambitions Renewable Energy Generation and CO2 Storage in Relation to the Energy Policy “Clean and Economical”

    (2008)
  • G. Heddle et al.

    The Economics of CO2 Storage, MIT LFEE 2003-003 RP

    (2003)
  • C. Hendriks et al.

    Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Systems: Economic Evaluation and Case Studies. GESTCO Technical Report

    (2003)
  • C. Hendriks et al.

    EC-CASE Carbon Dioxide Sequestration, M70066

    (2003)
  • M.d. Hoog

    Rotterdam Climate Initiative: CO2 Capture, Transport, and Storage in Rijnmond

    (2008)
  • IEA

    World Energy Outlook 2007

    (2007)
  • Cited by (51)

    • Characterisation of UK Industrial Clusters and Techno-Economic Cost Assessment for Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Implementation

      2022, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
      Citation Excerpt :

      For the offshore pipeline transport we used the model from Ghazi & Race (2013) (see eq. (6)) and costs provided by the Pale Blue Dot (2016) report. We also used the CO2 storage cost model from van den Broek, Ramírez, et al. (2010) and the storage costs from Pale Blue Dot (2016). Shipping costs are calculated, for the clusters for which this could be a CO2 transportation option (Grangemouth, South Wales, Southampton and Thames), by using the cost data reported in Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP) (2011) and implementing linear interpolation.

    • Technoeconomics and lifecycle assessment of bioreactors: wastewater treatment plant management

      2022, Techno-economics and Life Cycle Assessment of Bioreactors: Post-COVID-19 Waste Management Approach
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text